adminThe much-awaited document is expected to become the supreme law of the land if voted “yes” in the anticipated referendum.
The draft is now in the public domain as it is even circulating on the internet. Some of the issues include the recognition that no individual is above the law; all languages are official, equal access to the media and devolution of power inter alia.
Section 4.5 of the draft highlights that no death penalty should be executed on a person below the age of 21 and over 71. In addition, this section shockingly exempts women from this penalty, which is said to be applied on a person convicted of a murder committed in aggravating circumstances.
This section indeed raises eyebrows especially in this era of the consistent talk of gender equality. Surely in this regard, how equal then are men to their female counterparts? Does the exemption of women mean that they are superior or still inferior to men in terms of social accountability? Where has that rhetoric of “ender equality” gone to as far as the selective application of the death penalty is concerned?
I have realised that the exemption of women from this penalty contradicts the clause on the equality of every citizen before the law. If we are all equal before the law irrespective of who we are, why should women be spared from the death penalty?
The turn of the millennium saw the rise of various civic groups complementing the Government’s stance of championing the equality of men and women across all social facets — even in the execution of the law.
However, the issue of the death penalty seems to be retrogressive since it views the social behaviour and expectations of both sexes from the traditional perspective of the patriarchal society.
In this society, males dominated in terms of their social roles and women were merely subservient to them. This male domination also cultivated and inculcated in the minds of people certain stereotypes that depict men as solely behind most social anomalies. Therefore as such, ferocity and cruelty was associated with males. Women, on the contrary were viewed as emotional and incapable of committing gruesome acts.
Stereotypes are generalisations or over-simplifications of people or groups of people widely circulated in certain societies. These are unfounded notions towards certain people which are often negative. Therefore, the selective application of the death penalty as shown in the draft constitution, merely serves to perpetrate the gender stereotypes which contemporary society is trying to eradicate.
This penalty perpetrates the gender stereotype that views men as the sole social evil-doers. These generalisations view men as hot-headed and hard-hearted. They are negatively painted as villainous beasts that need to be tamed by legal framework. In the same manner, women are viewed as weak, tender-hearted and deserving sympathy — a view that most feminists have utterly rejected. The penalty also reinforces the myth that women are victims that deserve protection hence their exemption from the death sentence.
It is my view that in regard to the death penalty, policy makers should either apply it on both sexes or discard it altogether. Otherwise it is irrelevant especially in this era where the attainment of gender equality in all social levels is one of the main goals in our country.
Well, I understand it is what some Zimbabweans want, but not the majority, as per the outreach programmes conducted by Copac in gathering people’s views. But the question that still remains is that on what basis or context did the proposal for exemption of women from the death penalty hinge on?
Of course current evidence on the ground as shown in the media reveals that men are behind most hideous acts. There are many instances showing that a significant number of men (more than women) indeed commit atrocious crimes that may qualify to be termed aggravated murder. Such incidents for example include the sorrowful death of the family of seven in Isiganda area, Nkayi, which languished in an inferno last year after they were burnt to ashes in a hut by a male villager. Another incident where a death penalty may be executed is the Mpopoma case of a man who chopped his wife to death with an axe early this year.
However, this does not mean that women can never do the same in future. The same devil that pushes men over the edge to the extent of committing inhuman crimes can also jump to our women.
What will happen in the future if a woman commits a crime that deserves the execution of a death penalty? Will the court allow her to walk in the path of impunity simply because the constitution does not allow a female citizen to be hanged? Will it sympathise with her by giving her a lesser sentence simply because she is a “woman?”
It is said that about 60 people are on the death row including one woman. The question that also stands is on what legal action will be undertaken especially to a woman in case of an aggravated murder committed by both a man and woman?
It is high time we see gender equality manifesting even in the execution of the law irrespective of who has done what. This has to begin with the long overdue new constitution. The debate on who should be punished under the death sentence has to focus neither on womanhood nor manhood but rather on humanity. Let every individual who commits a crime that needs the execution of a death penalty, taste the wrath of the law regardless of whether they are a man or woman. If this is a difficult task for the drafters then they should throw the death penalty away rather than apply it selectively.
If both sexes are equal, then the application of a death penalty has to be executed as such. Otherwise the exemption of one sex will dig up those traditional discriminations between men and women that we thought are dead and buried.
Online Reporter